[prayformojo]

I would be interested to see some hand posts demonstrating your "maniac" style. It really does sound to me like you're describing aggressive vs. conservative play, not what most here would consider maniacal play. Your "rant" reads as a fairly standard, if undeveloped and perhaps unconsidered, generalization of some of the basic principles applicable to NL tournaments.

This statement, however:
[ QUOTE ]
Bad beats are a way of life, but another reason why i find bad beats not as bad as they use to be is that if you are a skilled tournament player, you should seldom find yourself all in, not because you don't put all your chips in the middle, but because you're the high stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

is just plain silly, especially in the context of online tournaments. How do you try to take down every pot, and build a big stack, without getting all your chips into the middle several times along the way, and being called, and winning? Once you get a big stack, how do you use it to your full advantage without putting significant portions of it at risk? This is not to say that you should care about bad beats or not push when a push is right. I just think the idea of expecting to consistently have such a huge stack, and such enormous fold equity, that you won't be at risk of elimination after a couple of bad beats, is a pipe dream.

You might want to re-read Harrington. I don't think he's advocating the sort of play you attribute to his work.